The Most Unpopular Way To Fight Climate Change That People Need To Get On Board With

By Michele Kaplan

So, as 45 (Trump) has pulled out of the Paris Accord, people are wondering what will happen in regard to climate change and the planet? After all, most people (including science) agree that climate change is one of the major factors behind such devastating storms as Hurricane Sandy, which made areas of New York City look like a war zone.

Climate change is no joke.

And it’s not like Hurricane Sandy is the only storm of this nature. Climate change has and continues to wreak havoc around the world.

And now The President wants to lessen our commitment to fighting climate change? While this is not a shocking outcome, (did we really expect him to do the right thing?), it is a dangerous one, especially for the low income communities and disabled population who are hit the hardest in such storms. Groups that he is already oppressing via his policies.

Related: The impact climate change on indigenous communities?

Granted leaving the Paris Accord, according to Jean-Claude Juncker (President of the EU), is not as simple as 45 seems to think it is and some cities are pledging to ignore 45’s decision and are committing to fight climate change. There are also a number of amazing environmental activist groups who will continue the fight for clean and sustainable energy, and help save the planet.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I think the goal of sustainable energy for all are absolutely attainable and definitely worth fighting for. And I will continue to proudly stand (or sit – as I’m in a wheelchair) with these groups.

But there’s another way that we can fight climate change, that does not require us to get permission from the powers that be. We do not need to petition the CEOs, in hopes they will see the light. It’s something that science has proven to be effective – and yet the moment the topic comes up, people seem to put their fingers in their ears and go “la la la la la la”, so they don’t hear what is being said. It’s unpopular to the point, that I questioned whether it was worth writing this article, as sure the choir would agree, but beyond that? However, I chose to write this article, despite the topic being unpopular, this. needs. to. be. said.

So what is it? What is possibly the most unpopular way to fight climate change that people need to get on board with?

image description: A photo of two cats on a small table. One cat is holding and it looks like they’re comforting the other cat

“Hold me, I’m scared.”

Moving towards a plant-based lifestyle (aka: vegan) to the best of people’s abilities.

Cue the frequently asked questions!

“Veganism? What? What’s that got to do with climate change?

The UN did a study that showed that the animal agriculture industry is one of the largest contributors to climate change.

Related:  Further statistics on how the animal agriculture industry impacts the earth, water supply and us all.

“Aren’t you just imposing your beliefs on other people?

Nope. While I am vegan for ethical reasons (as well as environmental), what I am proposing to you is not a matter of belief. This is a matter of science. And if we don’t like when 45 ignores the truth of science, then in turn, we must not ignore the truth of science, even if it’s truth that we’d prefer was not true.

“Great, so what? Now I have to eat lettuce all day?”

A common myth but actually vegan food is everywhere and there is a really good chance that you are already eating vegan food. For an example: french fries. Made from potatoes. A plant. Typically fried in some kind of oil like corn, canola, vegetable – which are from plants. Ketchup? Comes from tomatoes – a plant. Typically spices (unless it’s Cow Spice – which may or may not exist. I really rather not google that) are not derived from animals and thus are vegan. My point being is that vegan food is not only way more common than you think, it’s also way more than just rabbit food and the super pricey artisinal vegan cheeses, that people tend to think of when they hear they word vegan.

“I once met a vegan and they were totally [racist, transphobic, sexist, ableist, fatphobic, islamophobic, homophobic, etc etc. and/or just a real prick]

Yeah, me too. However, this doesn’t mean that veganism as a lifestyle/philosophy is that way, nor does it makes veganism a bad idea. (I’ve met some sexist jerks in the anti-war movement, doesn’t make war a good idea.)

Related: Is Veganism Ableist?

Related: Things Black Vegans Are Sick Of Hearing

Related: The Sistah Vegan Project

“But meat/animal skins is part of my culture (which is very important to me)”
Finding a balance between tradition and change is a very delicate one. That being said, please note that the following response is referring more to grandma’s recipe, rather than food/items used in a sacred ritual/event, as I don’t really feel it’s my place to speak on that.

It’s important to realize how these foods came to be tradition and part of our respective cultures. More than not, it wasn’t really a choice, but rather it was making the best out of the situation. It was making do with what they had.  Therefore one could argue that now it’s our turn to adapt (while maintaining our connection to our respective roots). Now it’s our turn to do what we need to do to survive. Lastly, keep in mind that a lot of recipes can be made vegan these days in very delicious ways.

“Yeah but what about this cause?”
There are so many forms of injustice in the world, it can be hard to keep up with everything. And yes, fighting climate change via plant based decisions, is one of many many important struggles. Keep in mind that going vegan or at least moving towards a plant based lifestyle doesn’t mean you need to join the animal rights movement and take it to the streets, if you don’t want to. Just make changes in your own life, and continue to fight for the causes closest to your heart.

“Yeah, but don’t humans need to eat meat?”
Unlike cats, humans are not obligatory carnivores, meaning they don’t need to eat meat. In fact, there are even vegan body builders who have no problem with energy levels nor building muscle.

A B&W photo of vegan body builder, Torre Washington who is flexing their muscles for the camera

Photo of Torre Washington, Vegan Bodybuilder. Photo Credit: Vegan Bodybuilding & Fitness

That being said, if you say that due your health, you are not able to alter your diet, I won’t challenge that, as I am not a doctor. I’m also disabled and I know that not everyone has the same body. Just as not everyone has the same access and options, especially if you live in a food dessert, where you don’t have the big supermarket in your neighborhood. Sure, shopping online can be an option for some, but isn’t always accessible if you are on food stamps. I get it.

Related: Peta can be pretty problematic, but they have this great list of every day junk foods that are unintentionally vegan that may be available in your corner store

Related: Thrive (an online grocery story that carries a lot of specialty vegan items) offers free memberships to people “are” low income

The truth is (and something you don’t hear about) no one is 100% vegan. I’m vegan, but I get my food at (and thus financially support) a supermarket that has a whole section that profits from the animal agriculture industry. Our system makes it impossible to do no harm. So, it comes down to doing the least harm and the most good. Start small. Eat one vegan (or plant based) meal or snack a day. You may already be doing that. Or again if changing your diet is legitimately not an option, you can also make an impact by choosing synthetic materials when purchasing shoes, jackets and/or bags etc. Share this article. Start this conversation with people you care about. There are many ways to make an impact and everyone has something they can contribute.

“I am utterly overwhelmed due to stress and/or oppression and the presidency, and now you want me to research this myself?”

I hear you. And nope. Just go here. It breaks it all down. https://www.whyveganism.com . The website was created by an animal rights group who does discuss the moral angle of veganism. However, they also have recipes, tips and a free vegan starter kit. If you prefer to watch a movie, which talks about veganism from the environmental perspective, Cowspiracy is on netflix. If you don’t have access to netflix, you can read the stats that are presented in the documentary online.

I know this is a sensitive and nuanced topic. I get it. I wasn’t always vegan. Food is culture. Food is comfort. Food is memories. But at the end of the day, the animal agriculture industry is one of the largest contributors to climate change. The powers that be are not going to do what’s best for the people, and thus we need to take action, to the best of our abilities to save ourselves. #Solidarity

 

This essay originally appeared on Rebelwheels’ Soapbox on June 3, 2017.


me in wheelchairMichele Kaplan is a queer (read: bisexual), geek-proud, intersectional activist on wheels (read: motorized wheelchair), who tries to strike a balance between activism, creativity and self care, while trying to change the world.

whyveganism.com

Should We Retire “Mother Earth”?

Image of a celestial mother earth holding planet earth in space.

By Eve Wetlaufer

We have all heard the ubiquitous term “Mother Earth,” and often in reference to treating the environment with more care. While the term might seem innocent, does anthropomorphizing the Earth actually help or hurt the environment? What about when the gender is female? What about when the female is a mother? What does the feminization of the Earth do for the feminist movement? I will first look at the ways in which giving the Earth a gendered role as our “collective Mother” is harmful, and then the ways in which it is beneficial. This is a topic that, for me, raises many more questions then it answers, but that is quite all right. As long as we continue to use this term, it is important to discuss the implications.

In the English language, nature and natural forces (hurricanes, tornadoes), many animals (cats, deer, rabbits), and, in general, whatever cannot be controlled take the feminine pronoun; when applied to nature, “she” still carries the connotations of femininity. ‘We should check carefully whether we really want to view our relationship with the Earth through genderdized lenses,’ warns Yaakov Garb. ‘What baggage will carry over from one domain to another (especially in a culture whose relation to both women and mothers is as misogynous as ours is)?’

– Greta Gaard, Ecofeminism, p.303

Femininity as well as motherhood carry many, often-stereotypical connotations in the world we live in today. When the Earth is given both a gender and a familial role, those connotations carry over. Gaard goes on to say that when the Earth is seen as female, she becomes associated with some of the cliché female attributes projected on to her such as the “damsel in distress,” “out of control,” and the sexualized female who can be a virgin, pillaged, and raped. In the later example, and issue Gaard points out is that the one who does the raping is culture, thus “culture is masculinized, and the human-nature relationship becomes one of compulsory heterosexuality” (104).

The second layer of the Earth’s given femininity is that she is a mother. The mother role takes on a whole other array of linked attributes such as nourishing, caring, supportive, and forgiving, and then on the flip side, stern, punishing, and spiteful. Mother Earth is often (subconsciously, even) seen as the female counterpart to “Father God,” who is most always male in the three major monotheistic religions of Christianity, Islam and Judaism. God is commonly understood to rule over (Mother) Earth, he created the Her (i.e. Psalm 24:1 states, “The Earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it,) and in contemporary commentary, God is often portrayed as working through the Earth with natural disasters, weather patterns, and the like. God and Mother Earth are commonly seen as separate from one another, but they are also in a hierarchical and heterosexual relationship of control.

A serene forest with a large tree canopy blotting out the sun

The many different characteristics associated with a female and mother Earth can be harmful not only to the Earth itself, but the humans living on it. For example, Simona Sacchi, Paolo Riva, and Marco Brambilla begin to answer the question of how anthropomorphizing the Earth helps or hurts it, especially when wearing the “wise mother” hat in their 2013 study, When Mother Earth Rises Up. They conducted two studies that tested whether or not a group of people would feel more or less inclined to help victims of a natural disaster when the Earth was anthropomorphized. They found that “humanizing nature undermines the tendency to support victims of natural disasters.” While hypothetically it could actually help people cope with natural disasters because the natural force that caused it is rational and therefore must have had a deliberate reason, that is, in fact, the exact reason people were less likely to help victims. If Mother Earth deliberately caused this natural disaster to destroy a group of people, she must have had a reason, the thinking goes, according to the study. The Earth is simply acting as the “wise and all-knowing” mother role attributed to her.

Mother Earth Painting

Another example of a Mother Earth characteristic that works against it is the “always-loving” and “ever-replenishing” role. It is said that you can treat those who love you the most, the worst, because you know they will forgive you. Time and again, we see how mothers of convicted killers, for instance, still deeply love their children. Unconditional love is something a parent often has for their children, and that dynamic carries over to the way humans can be careless in their treatment of the Earth. These individuals separate themselves so deeply from the Earth that they view environmental degradation as an outside problem, one that She can deal with, especially because She is a mother figure, who is often seen as a fountain of replenishing love, wisdom and forgiveness.

A final critique of the term “Mother Earth” is that it is typically linked with whiteness. Although artistic depictions of Mother Earth often show her with green skin, the Earth-loving, granola-eating, White people have appropriated sustainability and care for the Earth as their movement. Lolaboloca writes about this issue in her article Reclaiming Abuelita Knowledge As A Brown Ecofeminista. She writes:

The thing is, I DO care about the environment but I cannot stand it when white people pretend they are all connected to the earth and refuse to understand that many of us — Migrant Brown People — come from backgrounds where “environmentalism” is not talked about because we grow up doing unintentional “green” things.

She gives the example of reusable pads during menstruation. Associating Mother Earth singularly with whiteness also discounts many People of Color whose religious and cultural traditions incorporate Earth fundamentally and often in a maternal role, such as many Native Americans tribes, who have long linked the Earth with spirituality and the Mother of all.

An interesting case study regarding these issues can be seen in the current state of the Yamuna River. Snaking down from the Himalayas and passing through Delhi, the Yamuna River spans 853-miles through India. With the rapid industrialization and increasing population of Delhi, and India as a country, the Yamuna has become neighbor to many manufacturing plants that directly dump their waste into the river, while 60 million people rely on the Yamuna for drinking and bathing water. Although there have been protests and a movement to protect the river, in some areas it is a thick, black stream of sewage. For many Hindus, the Yamuna River is much more than just a holy river; it is quite literally the Goddess who is giver of life and a lover of Krishna. Many devotees perform rituals at the river, in which they bathe and then drink it ceremoniously.

Devotees wade in the Yamuna River, which froths heavily with pollution and is littered with trash

In David Haberman’s ethnography, River of Love in an Age of Pollution: The Yamuna River of Northern India, he describes how the belief in the Yamuna as a Goddess can actually cause a lack of environmental action for some people who believe Her to physically and spiritually wash away all sins, including the material waste. If She makes all unclean clean, then the pollution is inconsequential, and even offensive to some to discuss the current state of the river. Others feel the river’s condition can harm the living creatures in Her, but not the Goddess herself. And lastly, there is a group of Hindus who believe She (the river) is a victim and must be protected. This group has been a part of the protests and show us that personification of nature can in some cases be a motivator for action to create a more healthy Earth.

Before I explore the benefits of calling the Earth our mother, it’s important to take a step back and ask: Is anthropomorphism always bad? I don’t think so; in fact it seems to be a natural tendency for humans. We often relate the knowable (human) to the unknowable (non-human) in order to better understand. This is why we narrate what our companion animals are thinking, yell at technology when it isn’t working properly, and exclaim how wonderful the birds sound when they “sing.” In the same way, referring to the Earth as our mother allows us to frame the complexity and unspeakable mystery of the universe into terms we can easily relate to. This bridge has the budding opportunity to lead to empathy and compassion.

The Earth is a living, conscious being and the personification of it can help people to see that. This is one reason why James Lovelock’s Gaia Theory was so influential for the scientific community and beyond. In the late 1960’s Lovelock developed the Gaia Theory, which stated the organic and inorganic elements of the Earth have developed together as a single, self-regulating, living system. This allowed people to connect the Earth to any living organism, such as the human body. It also showed how humans as a species are dramatically effecting the harmony of the Earth, but how we also have the potential to live in accordance with the Earth’s equilibrium because we are a naturally occurring part of it. The theory is named after Gaia, Earth Goddess, whom in Greek mythology is said to have given birth to the universe.

"The Gaia Hypothesis: The earth is more than just a home. It's a living system and we are a part of it."

With all the problems discussed in calling and experiencing the Earth our Mother, it has shown to also be a pragmatic tool to help the environment. There are countless nature-based schools, gardening and conscious living publications, vegan cafes, cruelty-free beauty brands, health food stores, and more all using the name “Mother Earth,” “Mother Nature,” or “Gaia,” which draw people closer to nature-based living.

But perhaps the greatest benefit from identifying the Earth as our mother is something that goes much deeper into our core understanding of our place in the world. When we identify the Earth as our Mother, there is a greater likelihood that we will create a connection that allows people to empathize with the Earth and her suffering, as they would with a member of their family. Viewing the Earth as a member of one’s family is a profound shift from the mainstream understanding of our relationship to the environment, and even different than the mainstream environmental thought. If the Earth is a part of our family, or better yet, we are a part of it and all that lives and grows upon it, how could we ever bring ourselves to harm it? To harm her is to harm ourselves.

Thich Nhat Hanh elaborates on shedding the common dualistic mindset when it comes to our perception of the Earth and ourselves in his book Love Letter to the Earth. Just as we are made up of our biological parents, we are also made up of the Earth:

We often forget that the planet we are living on has given us all the elements that make up our bodies. The water in our flesh, our bones, and all the microscopic cells inside our bodies all come from the Earth and are part of the Earth. The Earth is not just the environment we live in. We are the Earth and we are always carrying her within us.

He goes on to say that by realizing our interconnection with the Earth, and understanding it to be our Mother, we are bound to change the way we act for the better.

We too can see that the Earth is a living being and not an inanimate object. She is not inert matter. We often call our planet Mother Earth. Seeing the Earth as our mother helps us to realize her true nature. The Earth is not a person, yet she is indeed a mother who has given birth to millions of different species, including the human species.

But don’t think that Mother Earth is outside of you. Looking deeply you can find Mother Earth within you, just as your biological mother who gave birth to you is also within you. She is in each of your cells.

If we need to turn to anthropomorphic terms to feel this connection and subsequent care for the Earth, is that worth the baggage that comes along with feminizing and giving the Earth the role of our collective mother? Ideally, we would simply be at peace with the Earth as it is; with utter awe, reverence, and respect for its intrinsic value. Ideally, we would break free of the desire to relate everything back to human terms, as if the very essence of our species is the central tenet of what all else needs to be compared to. But we do not live in an ideal world. So I believe that in order to get one step closer to it, we can call, and more importantly feel, the Earth to be our Mother. Moving towards a more inclusive sense of family; towards an interconnected relationship with our human and non-human brothers and sisters, and with our Mother Earth.

References:

Conniff, Richard. “The Yamuna River: India’s Dying Goddess.” Environment: YALE Magazine. : The Journal of the School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, Spring 2011. Web. 19 Jan. 2016.

Gaard, Greta Claire. Ecofeminism: Women, Animals, Nature. Philadelphia: Temple UP, 1993. 303-04. Print.

Haberman, David L. River of Love in an Age of Pollution: The Yamuna River of Northern India. Berkeley, CA: U of California, 2006. Print.

Hạnh, Thich Nhất. Love Letter to The Earth. Berkley: Parallax, 2013. Print.

Lalobaloca. “Reclaiming Abuelita Knowledge As A Brown Ecofeminista | Autostraddle.” Autostraddle. N.p., 20 Mar. 2014. Web. 19 Jan. 2016.

Sacchi, Simona, Paolo Riva, and Marco Brambilla. “When Mother Earth Rises Up: Anthropomorphizing Nature Reduces Support for Natural Disaster Victims.” Social Psychology 44.4 (2013): 271-77. American Psychological Association. Web. 17 Jan. 2016.


EveEve Wetlaufer is in her third year at New York University in the Gallatin Program, with an individualized major investigating the historical human orientation toward animals, spirituality, and the environment, with a minor in the Animal Studies Initiative. Eve also holds a certification in plant-based nutrition from the T. Colin Campbell Center for Nutrition Studies. She has worked at several animal rescues, most recently Catskill Animal Sanctuary, as an Outreach and Education intern. She is also the loving companion to a rescued hound named Chrissy.

whyveganism.com

Veganism, Degrowth and Redistribution

Bird subsumed in oil spill

By Marv Wheale

The Vegan Feminist Network is dedicated to scrutinizing the interconnections among speciesism, genderism, heterosexism, colonialism, racism, poverty, disablism, ageism, sizeism, ecocide…..  Today I would like to concisely examine some related elements that could exercise a role in overcoming these structures of subordination.

We know that veganism is the credible stance to take against the ideology and praxis of human  supremacy.  Yet when we practice and promote a vegan way of life within capitalism, veganism stands unopposed to the continuation of economic inequality, middle class values/lifestyles, the larger systems of animal use and ecological erosion (obviously vegans do mitigate these troubles to a limited extent).

Chicken corpses on conveyor belt

For veganism to succeed and not be isolationist it must be anti-capitalist and degrowth.  Though socialism may resolve economic class divisions, it’s emphasis on growing the economy puts a strain on ecosystems, nonhuman species habitats and climate (possibly as much as capitalist development).   Mining, industrial agriculture, intensive logging and fossil use are integral parts of many socialist agendas, except  the green kinds.  Perpetual production growth is a dead end for a liveable planet.

Compulsory societal wide frugal living is required for securing biosphere sustainability and enhancement.

We could call it “revolutionary simplicity”. But how do we end indigence with economic contraction?  Don’t the poor need growth to have a dignified life?  

Not in the conventional sense.  Improving employment, wages, living conditions, local vegan food production, education, public health and transportation and providing clean water don’t have the same devastating impacts on nature as aggregate expansion for private or government gain.

Free vegan food being offered at a Food Not Bombs tabling

Dispersing wealth evenly, vegan living, green energy, social housing, workers’ cooperatives, working less hours, men care-giving instead of worshipping porn and sports teams, cultivating talents, idle contemplation and revelry are types of progress that don’t ravage the earth and living beings like commercial extractivist societies do.

Redistribution, economic democracy,  animal/human animal equality, producing and consuming less, and post-growth economies would be powerful forms of intergroup solidarity and justice for all.

Veganist degrowth and redistribution is not a full-grown theory, plan of action or affiliation.  It is nonetheless worth exploring and perilous to dismiss.  Something nonvegan socialists and capitalists should adopt as well.   

SoaringFrigateBird

Dreamer?  Climate disruption, environmental despoliation, destitution and war may force us to take radical measures.  Now is the time to spread the conversation to raise consciousness to act for a nonviolent transition.

 


Marv is a moderator for the Vegan Feminist Network Facebook page.

Sustainability If

Painting of two bluefin tuna surrounded by swirls of hundreds of little fish

By Lisa Kemmerer

All oppression creates a state of war.

– Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex

 

“Sustainability” refers to an “ability to endure across time.” In the environmental movement, “sustainability” statements always entail an unstated “if.” In this usage, a particular action is deemed unsustainable if we value and wish to protect and preserve certain aspect of the natural environment.  Certain actions/consumer options are considered sustainable if they do not cause worrisome environmental problems.  Environmentalists who note that our beef habit is unsustainable are really saying that our beef habit cannot be sustained if we are to preserve rainforests and freshwater, if we are to arrest dead zone growth and climate change.  In these instances it is readily apparent that sustainability rests on common shared moral commitments to protecting the environment on which we depend. In this context, if we were to make a full and complete statement with regard to sustainability, we might say:

  • Eating bluefin tuna is unsustainable if we intend to protect endangered species.
  • Eating cheese is unsustainable if we hope to arrest the spread of dead zones.
  • Eating shrimp is unsustainable if we value ocean ecosystems, including essential, fragile deep-sea reefs.

In each of the above cases the “if” is rarely stated, and what we are likely to hear or read would look or sound something like this:

  • Bluefin tuna is unsustainable.
  • Cheese is unsustainable.
  • Shrimp is unsustainable.

When we finish the sentence, stating clearly the unspoken but essential “if,” we realize that statements of environmental sustainability rest on a moral commitment to make selections that decrease, rather than increase, environmental degradation.  In short, we come to see that sustainability statements rest on commonly held moral values.  We also come to see that our responsibility as consumers is often omitted—the product is labeled “unsustainable.”

What is most interesting about the missing “if” in the environmental context is that reinserting this conjunction allows us to see that sustainability is the key not just to environmental justice, but to social justice more broadly. Sustainability can fruitfully be employed in any social justice context. Consider in these more diverse applications of the term:

  • It is unsustainable for racist police to brutalize Black civilians if we hope to arrest the spread of hatred and violence.
  • Forcing a woman to carry a fetus to term is unsustainable if we value self-determination.
  • Permitting only heterosexuals to enjoy the financial and social benefits of legal marriage is unsustainable of we intend to protect human rights.
  • If we are committed to an ethic whereby we value justice and protect the vulnerable from the exploitation of the powerful, eating chickens is unsustainable.

 

Landscape view of a cattle herd in a cleared rainforest area

Sustainability is not just about cycling and recycling, it is also about redistributing wealth, yielding wrongly-gained power to the disenfranchised, and protecting all who are vulnerable from the miseries of exploitation and oppression.  Unsustainable behaviors—racist, sexist, homophobic, speciesist, ableist, ageist, and consumer behaviors—ought to be avoided not only if we value clean water and forests, but also if we value justice and peace.

At the end of the day, these unsustainable behaviors are interconnected. For example industrial fishing is unsustainable not only because it harms ocean ecosystems, but also because it is unjust—industrial fishing harms indigenous communities dependent on depleted ecosystems for subsistence survival.  Industrial fishing is therefore unsustainable if we intend to protect the comparatively powerless—ocean ecosystems, indigenous peoples, and fish—from powerful corporate interests and their indifferent/uninformed consumers. Similarly, factory farming is unsustainable if we value rainforests, fresh water reserves, and the earth’s present climate, and also if we value worker’s rights, the protection of defenseless farmed animals, and the health of unsuspecting consumers who suffer from heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, and obesity because of animal products they consume. These practices are unsustainable if—but not only if—we intend to protect the natural environment from horrendous environmental degradation. They are also unsustainable if we value justice and peace—if we intend to protect the vulnerable, whether minorities, the disenfranchised, or other species.

 

Further Reading

Kemmerer, Lisa. “Defending the Defenseless: Speciesism, Animal Liberation, and Consistency in Applied Ethics.” Les Ateliers de l’éthique/The Ethics Forum 9:3 (2015).

Kemmerer, Lisa. “Ecofeminism: Women, Environment, Animals.” DEP: Deportate, Esuli, Profughe. Ca’ Foscari University of Venezia, Italy, 23 (2013).

Click here to download the introduction to Speaking Up for Animals: An Anthology of Women’s Voices

Click here to download the introduction to Sister Species: Women, Animals, and Social Justice

 

KemmererDr. Kemmerer is a professor of Philosophy and Religion and a prolific author in animal ethics.  Her books include In Search of Consistency: Ethics and AnimalsAnimals and World ReligionsSister Species: Women, Animals, and Social Justice, Call to Compassion: Reflections on Animal AdvocacySpeaking Up for Animals: An Anthology of Women’s Voices, and Primate People: Saving Nonhuman Primates through Education. She is particularly interested in intersections of Nonhuman Animal advocacy and environmental advocacy in the spirit of Marti Kheel, as is evidenced in her 2015 publication Eating Earth: Environmental Ethics and Dietary Choice and her editorial work for the 2015 anthology Animals and the Environment: Advocacy, Activism, and the Quest for Common Ground.

 

Veganism and Natural Disasters in the Global South, How We Can Help

As the news reports the terrible death and destruction in the Philippines resulting from the worst storm ever recorded, I feel sick  with worry.  As an environmental sociologist and a vegan researcher, I’m well aware that these storms are only going to worsen and become more common as global warming continues to influence catastrophic climate change. Researchers have already documented that natural disasters are on the rise and we have every reason to predict this trend will continue.

Filipino women cling to wreckage in rising waters.

Along with the heartache I feel from these news stories is an absolute–dare I say–rage at those folks, stubborn and insulated by privilege, who insist that global warming is not real, is a hoax, or is a “natural” event.  Indeed, about half of Americans, most of whom have been influenced by conservative interests, believe that global warming is not a human-made phenomenon.  This frustrates me to no end because it is our ignorance here in the West that is hurting those living in third world regions.  It’s easy for us to kick back and ignore the scientific consensus about global warming when we’re living privileged lives here in the West.  While natural disasters are also on the rise here, it is people (human and nonhuman) living in the Global South who are especially impacted.  These are regions are close to sea level with high coastal populations, weak infrastructures, agriculture-based/weather dependent undiversified economies, high levels of poverty, and pitiful few resources to cope with disaster.  When a major storm hits, it is more likely to hit one of these areas.  Due to centuries of colonization and capitalist exploitation, these are the very areas that are least able to survive them.

So where does veganism come in?  Research shows that Nonhuman Animal agriculture accounts for 51% or more of Greenhouse Gas emissions.  Many cultures living in the Global South have traditionally been plant-based, but increasingly, global capitalist pressures have pushed them into adopting Western diets and producing Nonhuman Animals and their feed.  The Global South is exploited as a producer of non-vegan products, a market for our non-vegan products, and a dumping ground for the pollution those products create.  The inevitable natural disasters that also burden these area are also tied to this globalized project of speciesism.

Many international governance bodies have begun to question the dangerous consequences of Nonhuman Animal agriculture, but many succumb to capitalist interests and suggest reform rather than abolition.  The capitalist system itself is inherently exploitative and will always create high levels of suffering, but if we insist on retaining this economic mode of production, we need to get realistic about animal-based food systems.  Reformed systems still allow for the 65+ billion (and growing) Nonhuman Animal deaths each year.  Reformed systems also allow for a litany of debilitating and deadly diet-related diseases, which disproportionately impact poor persons.  These reforms also allow for continued environmental destruction and global warming which hits the global poor the hardest.  If we want to curb this massive, global-scale suffering, we must prioritize veganism.