What is your opinion about hard actions by animal activists? Is it useful and does it really make any difference for the animals?

Hard actions are useless in my opinion.

If you have a discussion and start calling one and the speakers, then you do not think: “Oh, look, he is evil, he will be right,” No, then you think he is not right, even if he can force you.

Peaceful resistance can be effective, but even then it seems to me that the barrier to access to a pig farm is pointless.Why this pig farm? Why not another?

The intent of action is to make people aware, to convince them, or because you can seize power with force (coup).

Animal rights activists cannot commit a coup, so they can only raise awareness and convince them.Greenpeace was always very useful in putting up banners. Whether it has helped a lot, the question is, but it was in any case a sympathetic action. Now I feel: “If it should, I’d rather eat a piece of meat”.

Action groups sometimes have a sectarian character.Along with the ideology, ‘ We are good, the others are bad ‘ you can easily use your own aggression to improve the world. You live in a kind of delusional world: violence is allowed to stop violence. Nonsense of course.

How did it?

Politics You can accomplish quite a lot.The problem is that many regulations are European. There one stimulates large-scale cattle breeding. But locally you can also exert a lot of pressure. But that does not succeed with a breaking iron, but with a word processor and reading glasses. And of course you must also speak to politicians. VVD and CDA. They have to find you really sympathetic.

Imagine that you are building a relationship with it and there is such an action of animal rights activists, then such a CDA’er says: “You have quite sympathetic ideas, but as those activists go on, it really goes too far.Those are extremists! Do you know them anyway? Are you going with that rig? “

O, o O, so you stand back for years.

Legally You can also accomplish a lot, with the same word processor and reading glasses.Here the climate lobby has scored well, because the government can be forced to implement its own policy.

They go there regularly and I’m not a fan of their actions.

In Belgium (I suspect also in the Netherlands) the phenomenon has existed for decades.So there is the ALF (Animal Liberation Front) that I like to compare with IS. Because they both abuse and hide behind ideologies to carry out terrorist actions. In Belgium we had the famous A.D. who for the pleasure of doing something for the animals by firing a Mc donaldsite. After her imprisonment, she converted and went to study law at the expense of the taxpayer. From me she had to compensate the victims first.

Furthermore, the same clubyou are responsible for burglaries, destruction and yes: animal cruelty.They let animals that never in nature learn to survive freely, knowing that these can never survive (or it can also be out of ignorance, very high I do not estimate them).

But I approve the moderate actions against all forms of animal suffering.It is true, of course, that companies like Mc Donalds are anything but concerned about the environment and human health. Nerts and other nurseries are guilty of animal suffering from profit.

As long as the government permits, there will always be people who abuse it in order to provide for their criminal needs.

The actions of animal activists -hard or soft -often have a counterproductive effect in my opinion because they are often unreasonable and show that people just don’t want to understand nature.

The case around the deer in the Oostvaardersplassen is a good example of this.There is a very unnatural situation in which we have created people. If the herbivores can breed but because there are no predators-wolves for example-there will be a plague that ends in a big dying off by hunger. This is how it has been in nature for millions of years. If you find that you can do three things

  1. Wolves turn off (and why not?

They are already there anyway)

  • Shooting animals and keeping the population in balance
  • Nature to let go and make the beasts stretch
  • Instead, animal activists are demanding that the problem is artificially maintained by feeding…

    These people are against nature.No that’s not ‘ animal friendly ‘. It is unreasonable and cruel.

    I myself am active in this movement (but have never broken the law, let alone use violence).For the privacy of friends who were in Boxtel-people with the best intentions for all living creatures! -I answer this question anonymously.

    I am not necessarily opposed to actions that are not legal.I assume that is meant by this question. However, I find that violence (physical, verbal) and threat are out of the question, and that illegal actions should only be considered if there is no other way to make your point. In Boxtel There was no question. That way you get media attention to the form of the action, and not the content. And before that, you have violated the law. I do not approve of this kind of action, like the arson and so mentioned in the article. What is it? For example, liberation actions and undercover things (like Animal Rights often does). At first, individuals are actually rescued, at the second you generate substantive attention to how the industry fits together.

    The hard actions of animal activists do not help the animals and can even be harmful to them.In any case, the actions do not ensure that animal keepers improve their method. However, they cause indignation and annoyance with the holders (and he others).

    It is easier to catch flies with syrup DSN with vinegar, as the saying goes, so if the activists want something to improve, they can do that better in a different way.They are now in the news, but in a week no one has more about it and nothing has changed.

    The people who keep those animals try to keep their heads above water in a landscape full of competition, rules, subsidies, discounts and squeeze-out by customers, who want to sit on the first grade for a few cents and otherwise go to another that does Want to deliver that price.

    Simply put: Either the animals are treated well, but then the products produced are much more expensive for the consumer, or they are treated less well and then the products are affordable for everyone.

    So the farms that breed animals and the farms that process the animals have to make arrangements with the companies that sell the processed meat, so that the animals are better treated, the farmers get better paid, the processing industry also has something But the consumer is no longer lost than for massively bred and produced stuff.

    The various interests of the parties concerned are an edhter, that this solution is far from being in Sicht.

    In that light it helps in a stall to penetrate the animals really no further.It is forbidden by law. That the activists were allowed to return home after 1 day is not actually what it should be. There are better ways to achieve changes, it seems to me. Especially unthat every change takes time and cannot be enforced.

    Hard actions are at all times to reject.With hard actions, you are all sympathetic to supporters and hunt your opponents against you in the harness. This will allow you to achieve an opposite result. This applies to both animal activists and blackheaded opponents, for neo-Nazis.

    When you want to convince people, you have to keep positive actions and not destroy companies.In addition, animal activists come to me as townspeople who have lost contact with nature and are also busy losing contact with humanity. They often put the animal on a higher plan than humans, mostly led by abdominal feeling and rarely steered by any sense of reality. All the more aiding the animal, the fanalist the activist.

    I think that our Calvinistic Netherlands is still not so served by extremism.Hard actions soon belong to extremism, and we do not like it. We consult and Polderen. Occasional muscle balls show, OK, but also no more than that. We do not like to threaten and quarrel.

    Eventually the sheep do not spin any yarn I think.


    What animal activists do for animals is really useful!Many animals have thus been able to evade a threat of extinction.

    Did you know that man is also used as a kind of “animal product”?

    In terms of meat, to make clothes, etc…?!(Tip: Word “human RESSOURCE (s)”.

    Now picture you how you would feel it as people without anesthetic, etc.Sex.

    That would be bad anyway?!

    Why animals near our lives…

    They are there to make us evolve spiritually.What we do with them… Another one also does with us.

    If we manage to stop that process… Then it’s already a big victory that we can crows!

    The cloning of meat is already a step in the right direction… As well as vegetarian life.

    New goal:

    Find a way to live vegetarian, without having to say the necessary nutrients.

    Leave a Reply