Simulposted with Thomas Paine’s Corner
by Steven Best, PhD

“Brothers and sisters, friends, and I see some enemies. I think we’d be fooling ourselves if we had an audience this large and didn’t realize that there were some enemies present.”
Malcolm X often started his talks with this ironic greeting, as his audiences often contained a nest of agents, traitors, and spies. And when I look out at the diverse aspects of the animal advocacy movement, I see the same, including FBI and law enforcement, those who condemn militant direct action while knowing nothing about it, those who monitor my pages on social-networking sites to report to their pacifist leaders, and those sad victims of the Stockholm Syndrome who have more sympathy for the “humanity” of seal killers than for the courageous members of the underground who risk it all for nonhuman animals.
There are splits, divides, factions, and opposing camps, and the different philosophies and tactics sometimes lead to insults and name-calling. But, while they may not like each other, adversaries generally harbor no malice and there is no intent to seriously harm the other.
Gary Francione, however, has stepped beyond the bounds of professional rivalry, maliciously trying to damage my character and reputation. As many people know, he and I have locked horns in the past and traded a number of blows. But he has put on some brass knuckles, dangerously escalated the conflict, and intensified the tensions between the pacifist and direct action camps of the vegan and animal rights movements. He has no problem using for his purposes the corporate-state discourse that demonizes animal activists as criminals, violent, and terrorists. He is a menacing McCarthyite on the loose, taking aim at anyone who dares challenge his infallibility. Ironically, Francione wears a halo of ahimsa and speaks with the golden tongue of nonviolence and compassion. When wearing his public mask, he appears as principled, professional, fair, and kind; in his private dealings, however – as his former disciples and critics consistently reveal – he is arrogant, controlling, insulting, duplicitous, conniving, aggressive, and verbally abusive. He walks on water as a 21st century Jain, but he is a Machiavellian wrestling in the mud.
On the occasion of a profile story on me in the El Paso Times,[1] Francione seized on a reporter’s mistake that linked me with the underground activity of the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) rather than the aboveground work of the North American Animal Liberation Press Office (NAALPO). Hurling wild accusations throughout the Twittersphere, Francione revived two long-discredited charges against me, namely: (1) I am not only a supporter of the ALF, but a bona fide member, and (2) I recruit my students into the underground movement. In a public forum with over 1,000 followers, Francione made accusations the National Enquirer would not print, and then proceeded to cover up his lies with more lies.
Francione has a history of making totally unfounded and serious accusations against me. In September 2009, for instance, he accused me of orchestrating death threats against him and others, and used this for his pretext to pull out of a debate (for a second time!) with me that apparently he was not up to.[2] Moreover, he “named names” of individuals listed as administrators on a Facebook page, with the intent to smear them as violent extremists, unconcerned that some had no responsibility for, or control over, the page and others were his loyal – now former – supporters.
With these new accusations, we see a clear pattern and intent to harm by any means necessary, a strange ambition for an avowed pacifist. Criticism I invite, it is how I correct and improve on flaws in my reasoning and positions. Insults I can do without, but I even look for any productive criticism that might be buried in the invective. Misinterpretations, distortions, and straw men caricatures compel me to set the record straight. But malicious charges that I am involved in criminal activity and that I lure my students into the same underground world of balaclavas and sabotage, such as could cause me serious legal, professional, and financial trouble — these accusations are beyond annoying, they are insidious, dangerous, and destructive on many levels.
My apologies to readers and activists exasperated with the Best-Francione wars. I know, I tire of them too. But a few remarks are in order here. First, these conflicts are not mere ego battles between two trifling academics, as serious issues are at stake. My polemics against Francione were motivated by a grave concern over the hegemonic influence he wielded over the vegan and abolitionist movements, one that stifled a healthy pluralism of ideas and ossified in a dogmatic cult of followers who served as his attack dogs. My goal was to expose the many serious weaknesses and flaws in his theory, and to create a radical alternative, sharply different in methodology, philosophy, politics, and tactics.[3] Relatively satisfied with the success of the critical work, I shifted to the constructive work of a far broader and more political concept of veganism, abolitionism, and social change. But Francione – a pseudo-pacifist who thrives on conflict and hostility – apparently grew restless in the calm of the détente and not only revived the conflict, he escalated it in a provocative and dangerous way that cannot be ignored.
Thus, I write this essay to vindicate myself from Francione’s lies, to expose him as a hypocrite and charlatan whose character is as flawed as his positions, and to denounce his McCarthyesque and greenbaiting tactics designed to demonize and destroy individuals and unleash forces of repression and fear. We must never tolerate these insidious ploys, not from those outside our movement and certainly not from within. I therefore draw a line in the sand right here and now and hold Francione accountable for his lies, defamations of my character, and allegations of criminal activity. With this essay, I throw down the gauntlet, and I challenge Francione to prove his malicious claims. But since he cannot produce evidence that does not exist, I demand a public apology and retraction, and recommend that since he so evidently cannot lead the movement, have the decency to get out of the way.
Me, Myself, the ALF, and I
It is no secret that I have been a vocal supporter of the ALF. In fact, I might be the only US academic (or anywhere in the world to my knowledge) who openly supports and defends an illegal underground group that is universally denounced as a “terrorist” organization and which along with the Earth Liberation Front (ELF) the state baptized as the number one “domestic terrorist” group in the US. In 2001, after careful study of their history, arguments, and results, I moved from a neutral to a supportive stance. Never one to hide my commitments and beliefs, I came out in favor of the ALF because I concluded that their actions are effective, necessary, and just. Governments, animal exploitation industries, and most mass media characterize the ALF as violent terrorists, but I see them as freedom fighters and counter-terrorists.
In 2004, I published, with Anthony J. Nocella II, the first academic volume on the underground animal liberation mvement, Terrorists or Freedom Fighters: Reflections on the Liberation of Animals (Lantern Press). In 2006, I co-founded the North American Animal Liberation Press Office (NAALPO), and currently am listed as an “advisor.” I made dozens of forays into the public realm in which I openly defended the ALF, such as I did in 2005 at the University of Iowa, just two weeks after a dramatic raid that rescued 401 nonhuman animal prisoners of a vivisection laboratory. In 2004, I was banned for life from the entire UK, as the British Home Office had deemed my ideas and words a “threat to the public order.”
It is crucial to emphasize that my support for the ALF has only taken the form of philosophical justification for and defense of sabotage and liberation tactics. But in his relentless bid to demonize me and, more generally, to discredit the entire militant direct action (MDA) movement, Francione accuses me of deeper and more problematic levels of involvement. Depicting me as an irrational “chest pounding” demagogue who exhorts others to take the risks I am too cowardly to accept myself. Francione thereby charges me with “criminal solicitation” of young people in general, and my students in particular.

But even this absurdity is not enough to quench Francione’s thirst for revenge, and so he leaps to the next level of damnation, accusing me of being a bona fide member of the ALF. In his over-active imagination, I somehow maintained anonymity, successfully evaded FBI surveillance, and slipped into the night at will to assume my Superman role of animal liberator, returning by daybreak just in time to return to my Clark Kent role as professor.
In Good Company
Francione is not the first to level these absurd accusations against me. No, the honor belongs to David Martosko, “research director” of the Center for Consumer Freedom, a Washington-based corporate front group that lobbies on behalf of food, alcohol, and tobacco industries. In May 2005, on C-Span live, Martosko appeared before the Environment and Public Works Committee, a contemporary version of the House Un-American Activities Committee.[4] Presiding over the staged affair was Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), a student of McCarthyite politics best known for his insistence that global warming is the greatest “myth” and “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated.”[5] In attendance were not only powerful politicians, but also top FBI brass. This was not a setting in which one wants to be falsely accused of criminal actions, yet it was here that that Martosko described me as the ALF Kingpin, the Bossman, the Capo, the Mack Daddy, the one who brings the ALF to the classroom and the classroom to the ALF.
In his most somber “war on terror” tones, Martosko informed the court: “Dr. Best is at the epicenter of the organizational aspects of what the ALF is doing. Dr. Best is part cheerleader, part recruiter. He uses his classroom freely and openly to indoctrinate adolescents with ambitions and simultaneously praises the ALF and ELF. He is a conduit for terrorism to the mainstream.” When asked by Inhofe about my alleged influence in the ALF, Martosko – conjuring up surreal images of me as the ultimate salesman, the Willie Loman of the underground, quick with a smile and a handshake — smugly replied, “He closes the deal, he seals the deal.” When asked by Inhofe if he believes that I “advocate criminally-based activity,” Martosko intoned before the court: “It is a fact.” He railed against the injustice that I, as a “spokesman for terrorists” and liberation army recruiter should be able to use my faculty post to indoctrinate my students and mend “violent extremists” a dash of intellectual legitimacy.”
In true McCarthyist form, Martosko took the license to spew outrageous accusations of serious consequence without responsibility or burden of proof. He strutted from the chambers as I was left to deal with the radioactive fallout. Martosko’s testimony no doubt played a role in my being deposed from my position as department chair. They could have caused no end of financial and legal trouble for me, as well as set the wheels in motion for firing me from a tenured position (others have been fired on flimsier grounds). If they were not already surveilling me, the FBI had good reason to begin doing so, on a mission to find a connection between me and the underground and the conduit through which I channeled students into criminal action.
Certainly, my university was compelled to investigate the charges, and perhaps wanted to find them true and thus remove a lone critical voice on campus. I imagine that the administration and campus police interviewed students and reviewed my phone messages and email correspondence. Needless to say, no evidence surfaced against me, the Dean of Liberal Arts informed me the charges were viewed as politically motivated, and the case was closed. It strikes me as impossible for a high-profile advocate of MDA such as myself to be involved in the underground without being caught and arrested, and ludicrous that I could shuttle students in and out of the underground like Harriet Tubman did in the 19th century with the underground railroad. And what exactly is the lure to motivate students with no deep conviction in animal rights to sacrifice a decade of their lives in prison — extra credit?
For the record, Herr Martosko, Herr Inhofe, and Herr Francione: I defend the ALF only in words, never deeds; I defend, but do not exhort. I work for animal rights only in legal ways, never illegal ways, and I have no criminal record. I operate openly in the aboveground movement, and never clandestinely with the underground. I am not a member of the ALF, nor do I know or communicate with anyone in the ALF. My relation to the ALF as an outside sympathizer is entirely peripheral, and hardly stems from a command post at its “epicenter,” a ludicrous metaphor for a decentralized movement. Knowing full well how difficult it is just to lure students to free food at a vegan pot luck for extra credit, it is amusing to wonder how they could be persuaded to enlist in an underground “domestic terrorist” organization, and lose years of their freedom for a grade.
The Lies That Liars Tell
And so, with the semantic confusion provoked by a reporter, Francione rehabilitated an old lie, long discredited, to see what mileage he could get out of it. As journalists often do, the reporter who interviewed me and wrote the story made a serious error in associating me with the ALF, rather than the NAALPO. The seemingly small semantic difference has huge implications as it aligns me with the underground rather than the aboveground.
Francione’s accusations were brought to my attention by Ian Smith. During the course of a Twitter conversation with Francione, Smith became alarmed at the accusations he was mounting against me and found Francione’s behavior objectionable enough to contact me. The most important part of the exchange follows below (I translated Twitterspeak into conventional dialogue format). To his credit, Smith adopts a skeptical approach, looks to see what should and should not be read into the story, and refuses to affirm something as true for which he has no clear grounds to accept. Francione, in contrast, is quick to assume, see what he wants to see, and hurl wild and reckless accusations.
Francione: I should also say that I think it is remarkably irresponsible for Best to be engaging in criminal solicitation of young or otherwise impressionable people. They will end up going to jail because of his chest pounding/heavy breathing.
Smith: Are you claiming that Best is actively recruiting for the ALF and/or inciting individuals to commit criminal acts? As opposed to a philosopher arguing that it is moral (perhaps requisite) to break the law on certain occasions?
Francione: Yes, I am.
Smith: That strikes me as wreckless but perhaps you are privy to much that I am not – either way it is a bold claim.
Francione: It is not bold at all. It is absolutely clear.
Smith: It’s certainly not clear from the El Paso Times article – I’m not sure what you are relying on to make this assertion…
So we see Francione in fact was pressing not just the criminal solicitation claim, serious enough of a falsehood, but also the direct involvement claim, thereby repeating Martosko’s slander that I am an ALF member and recruiter, drawing from a ready-at-hand pool of students and young supporters.
Once we first posted content from the Twitter conservation between Francione and Smith, an alarmed Australian activist wrote Francione to complain about the divisive and reckless nature of his charges. Even though he had to have been aware at this point that his “private” conversations’ cover had been blown, he nonetheless unequivocally denied making this accusation. Here is the transcript of their email exchange, sent to me by Ms. Reyes:
Name: Cristina Reyes
Subject: Steve Best
Message: Hello Gary Francione,
I reside in Australia and respect your work, I am an Environmental
Scientist and also work to help raise awareness for animal rights.
I have come to realize with time that the animal rights movement is
highly fragmented, due to different ideas and tactics. Ego is
something else to blame for this fragmentation.
At the end of the day we are fighting for the same cause and
different opinions and ideas are required in order to have a wider
approach to the animal rights issue.
For this reason I would ask you to please respect the approach that
Steve Best has, he too is in the same fight as us. The rainbow has
many different colors.
However, having said this, he does not recruit students for Animal
Liberation. He helps to create awareness and incite critical
thinking.
Regards,
Cristina Reyes
Bsc. Environmental Science, Adv. Dip Environmental Management.
Sydney-Australia.
Re: Hello Gary Francione
Thu, 11 February, 2010 4:31:28 PM
From: Prof. Gary L. Francione <gfrancione@earthlink.net>
To: Cristina Reyes <crisbrenda2003@yahoo.com>
Dear Ms. Reyes:
I never said he tried to recruit students.
I said that he engaged in the solicitation of violent and illegal acts. And it is clear that he does.
You may disagree with me but please do not misrepresent what I said.
GLF
This is false, and Francione is a liar. Once again, in his exchange with Ian, he said:
Ian: Are you claiming that Best is actively recruiting for the ALF and/or inciting individuals to commit criminal acts? As opposed to a philosopher arguing that it is moral (perhaps requisite) to break the law on certain occasions?
Francione: Yes, I am.
Ian: That strikes me as wreckless but perhaps you are privy to much that I am not – either way it is a bold claim.
Francione: It is not bold at all. It is absolutely clear.
Throwing Down the Gauntlet
Demagogues, politicians, false prophets, charlatans, and cult leaders thrive on maintaining a respectable public face, while in private they satisfy their lust for power and control. Francione depends on the public image portraying him as a peaceful, compassionate, non-judgmental man, but anyone who interacted with him without bending their knee in fawning subservience and conformity can tell a different story.
The transcripts and emails we have published were “protected” from public viewing (anyone who is not a Twitter “follower” of Francione is locked out), and it is not hard to understand why. With these transcripts, one gains access to the real Francione, not a loving, understanding, and logical man in search of truth, but rather a spiteful person intent on destroying perceived enemies.
The ironies are too rich. Here we have a lawyer making libelous claims, an ethicist who lies, a scholar who doesn’t substantiate his claims, a philosopher exploiting vague and ambiguous terms, and a supposedly pious man of peace and love, a 21st century Jain, who, filled by toxic hated and violent emotions, launches an attack on a rival with intent to cause harm – psychological, financial, professional, legal, and otherwise.
Carl Sagan once said that “extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.” Well Francione, since you have certainly made some extraordinary claims, just where is your extraordinary evidence? You excel in making them, but never substantiate them. But how does one “prove” a lie, anyway, I wonder?
[1] “Controversial UTEP professor Steve Best risks much in fight for animal rights,” Adriana Gomez Licon, February 8, 2010 (http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_14355275). Complete unedited Twitter exchanges as well as related email correspondence is available at Scribd (http://www.scribd.com/doc/26811899/For-Details-Read-His-2-8-10-Twitter-Exchange)
[2]Will Potter, “Alf to Vegan Death Threats?,” Thomas Paine’s Corner, September 1, 2009 (http://thomaspainescorner.wordpress.com/2009/09/01/%E2%80%9Calf-to-vegan-death-threats%E2%80%9D/ ) .
[3]Steven Best, “Manifesto for Radical Abolitionism: Total Liberation by Any Means Necessary,” Negotiation Is Over, November 13, 2009 (http://negotiationisover.com/manifesto-for-radical-abolitionism/).
[4] Testimony of David Martosko, May 18, 2005 (http://epw.senate.gov/109th/MARTOSKO_TESTIMONY.pdf).
[5] Steven Best, “Senator James Inhofe: Top Terrorist Threat to Planet Earth” (http://www.drstevebest.org/Essays/SenatorJamesInhofe.htm).
**********
Dr. Steven Best is NIO’s Senior Editor of Total Liberation. Associate professor of philosophy at UTEP, award-winning writer, noted speaker, public intellectual, and seasoned activist, Dr. Best engages the issues of the day such as animal rights, ecological crisis, biotechnology, liberation politics, terrorism, mass media, globalization, and capitalist domination. Best has published 10 books, over 100 articles and reviews, spoken in over a dozen countries, interviewed with media throughout the world, appeared in numerous documentaries, and was voted by VegNews as one of the nations “25 Most Fascinating Vegetarians.” He has come under frequent fire for his uncompromising advocacy of “total liberation” (humans, animals, and the earth) and has been banned from the UK for the power of his thoughts. From the US to Norway, from Sweden to France, from Germany to Russia to South Africa, Best shows what philosophy means in a world in crisis. (See Dr. Best’s Complete Biography)
If the nonhumans could fight back, their tormentors would have expired long ago. We have an obligation to expose the abusers. It is the LEAST we can do! I welcome your emails & contributions.
If you have a Facebook account, join the extended Negotiation Is Over network.”.
To submit work to NIO for consideration and publication, please send an email to camille@negotationisover.com with the subject “submission”.
To receive NIO updates, please send an email to camille@negotiationisover.com with the subject “subscriptions”.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Dr Best notes the two sides of Francione in this article. It is troubling indeed that such baseless attacks are directed at a leader in both human and non human emancipation. I will add a few points related to Francione’s following, the cult of Francione, and its two sides.
Both the man and his cult are self described “abolitionists”. But while Francione expounds on his philosophy of abolition, he has given followers little or no outreach and advocacy strategy; the abolitionists do nothing to abolish our world’s use of animals. Moreover, because he criticizes not only the MDA approach but in fact all approaches that differ from his own, the cult has a divisive nature. Indeed, most Francione supporters are adept at vegan bashing, something which he (ironically) warns against.
So we have a group of vegans who are often regarded as the “abolition movement” in AR, who are doing little for abolition, and who spend in inordinate amount of time bashing other vegans. And by amalgamating their larger points of abolition with their requisite and relentless attacks on others in AR (who are often the ones doing real abolition work) while having no tangible strategy to abolish animal exploitation other than by being dietary vegans, they have inspired countless activists to give up the struggle. Rather than put themselves on the line and risk failure, the cult of Francione is mostly a group of dietary vegans who prefer to sit at their computers and point fingers at active vegans who make an effort to end animal suffering.
(part of a longer note at: http://www.facebook.com/posted.php?id=9991091739&share_id=105115882860625&comments=1#s105115882860625)
…Then, I wonder how can we abolish such a system by attacking it directly i.e. entering their facilities?
Francione does a great job at sticking his foot in his own mouth, but i have to admit that i got great pleasure reading this article, watching him get a much deserved kick in the ass. Thank you Dr. Best!
I can`t help but wonder if this guy`s got all his marbles.
I`ve spoken with him personally on line a few times and heard him speak in interviews, each time getting the distinct impression that he loves the sound of his own voice. His responses are one huge run-on sentence, that in a large part make no sense in assisting to help the movement. (and his followers have also learned this well)…IMO
How sad that Francione has devolved into a dogmatic automaton, doing nothing but regurgitating his doctrine and spewing venom at the catalysts of the movement. Francione and his apostles are about as pacifistic as the zombies in Night of the Living Dead.
What I find most interesting about Francione, is, here is a Law Professor, someone who teaches the most corrupt hated profession there is. Attorneys are nothing but hostile unethical liars, and he is claiming to be a caring pacifist. Nope, don’t buy it. He does nothing tangible as outreach in the vegan community that I can see. There are many campaign ideas he can do to advance the cause. But all I hear and see is him do, is launching personal attacks of the Animal Rights Activists. He needs to do his work and respect others for their work. I actually know of how harmful his opinions have caused other activists besides his insane jealousy of Steve Best. It hurts the animals we are trying to save. Cease and Desist Francione from your slanderous public statements.
Another excellent essay and I must say very compelling. It seems that those who are pro “critical thinking” are a great threat to those who cannot think for themselves ie, government officials as well as much of the public. A critical thinker is a well educated, well informed and very intelligent individual who will do their research and go out there against all odds, speak the truth no matter what the cost and gain the respect of many other critical thinkers due to their honesty, integrity and convictions. People like Francione have no basis to prove their theories therefore they resort to bullying and lying in order to make themselves look or seem respectable and knowledgeable to an apathetic group of people who have not the will nor the ability to think for themselves. The attacking and name calling tactics go over very well with the narrow minded individuals who have not a clue of what they are being lead into. Instead of thinking for themselves they let their “leader” speak for them. How many times have we seen this in the churches, cults (Jones Town for example) and even within our own families friends and associates. Lets just go along with whatever is popular at the time and leave it at that. As long as we have what we need to survive, to hell with what’s happening out there. Is it laziness on their part or is it fear of bringing unwanted attention upon themselves by those who seek to debate and educate (Dr Steve Best) or who seek to destroy and defraud (Francione)?
Again, Francione digs himself deeper and deeper…
Once upon a time and far away, whenever I would see or hear the name Gary Francione, I would think, “Wow, now there’s a well meaning compassionate voice for the animals”… sadly now, the only associations that come to mind is stagnation, fraud and defamatory accusations.
Too bad Francione’s efforts have shifted from the plight of suffering animals, to now, an all out effort to discredit Dr. Steven Best and further cast shadow on true well meaning activist’, such as the ALF.
A word of advice to Mr Fancione, stop obsessing over a news reporter’s error and focus on doing something that might actually help the billions of suffering animals!
BTW… great essay Steve. And hey, there are some of us who love a man in tights! Indeed, you are a super hero! …; )
**Dr. Steven Best = Hell yeah, what ever it takes to save animals!
**Gary Francione = hmm…well ok, as long as it doesn’t offend anyone…
True violence is inflicted upon innocent nonhuman animals by slavemasters and murderers. The compassionate members of the ALF who help these other animals win liberation by destroying inanimate property and freeing them from the cages are heroes. For Gary Francione to call this “violence” is to distort reality and value property over life. This only helps corporate exploiters continue to brainwash the masses with speciesist propaganda and keep them consuming mindlessly.
To The Militant Community:
I have followed the debate between Francionites and militants in the comment section of Francione’s latest slander of radicals and betrayal of animal liberation on the Opposing Viewpoints website (http://www.opposingviews.com/i/rejecting-violence-within-the-animal-rights-movement).
More than the content of the arguments back and forth, I was interested in whether I could still hold the slightest doubt I could have that Francione and his followers are not a cult, literally a cult: an authoritarian leader who presents himself as infallible and in firm possession of the Truth and everyone else is mired in error and struggling in confusion.
The corollary of a dogmatic leader is an obedient following, and that Francione has. Nowhere, ever, have I seen one Francionite admit that their leader could be in error (which would make him human like the rest of us), that there were difficult questions surrounded by uncertainty or required experimentation in practice to work out, or that the doctrine was not perfect as is, and an answer to virtually any and all questions.
What settled this question in my mind today finally is Francione always dodges the question of what evidence did he have to level serious charges against Best, and responded by asking the MDA camp if they support intimidation tactics. He did not, and apparently, cannot answer the question. Why? Because he is WRONG, a devastating thing to admit for a God.
And thus it is no surprise that there was zero internal open or (God forbid) critical discussion of Francione’s ill-advised attack on Best, and his followers have remained silent as if it never happened, and as if Best did not have a damn good reason to respond as he did. No, history is whitewashed in a Stalinist way, such that there was no event prompting Best’s reply, his reply was not a reply at all, but an aggressive attack.
Morever, all discussion of this particular point is being systematically CENSORED on the Opposing Viewpoints site, in perfect harmony with Francione’s own practices and repressive viewpoints.
I have concluded that what we are dealing with here truly is a cult, and a menacing and frightening one I must say, now I consider one of the most serious obstacles to progress toward animal liberation.
I have also concluded that it is a total waste of time to engage Francione or anyone in his cult about any issues, for they will always have the same answer, they never be able to think in new or fresh ways, they will always pontificate and torch their critics in straw man effigies, and they will always be convinced of their absolute truth and moral purity.
There is no honesty or integrity in Francione camp, one might debate Darwin with creationistst. They are one of the greatest obstacles to animal liberation we face. Their reactionary nature is glaringly obvious now and their complacence, lifestyle veganism, and attack on the militant wing of our movement serves the purposes of state repression and corporate domination.
I recommend we forget these benighted culties and podpeople and just go about and advance a viable alternative to them, and forget dialogue, it is impossible.
They are irrelevant, reactionary, nothing but shit on our shoe. So let’s wipe them off, move on, never look back, and commit ourselves to destroying the global capitalist-speciesist system of hierarchical domination before it destroys us and countless other species. This is a war, make no mistake about it, and we have no time to waste.
I agree, Paul. I’ve decided to stop commenting on the Opposing Views article now for these very reasons. Despite my effort and those of others, it seems no progress was made with Francione’s loyalist followers. Encouragingly, I have received many messages of thanks from others who appreciated my comments so all was not lost.
All I know is that I want Francione and his fucking, brainless little cult destroyed!! One of his cult members, Kate-go vegan and nobody gets hurt, trolled into our chat with Anthony on Saturday and tried to start some trouble. She was kicked out right away! What in the hell does, go vegan and nobody gets hurt mean!! It means billions of animals are murdered every year and that cult ignores it, doesn’t give shit! Cop Outs!!! It’s imperative that this group of mindless souls are stopped before they brainwash anymore activists….. They have dark hearts and even darker souls….
Just my thoughts…..
Um……. While I can’t deny that there is something dogmatic about Francione & Co., I am not at all pleased with the hyperbole and unrestrained cursing going on in this post and comments. Someone referred to Francione as a reactionary, but the comments here sound quite reactionary to Francione. The last comment made no sense to me. “What in the hell does, go vegan and nobody gets hurt mean!! It means billions of animals are murdered every year and that cult ignores it, doesn’t give shit!” Seriously, what does this comment mean? What does “go vegan and no body gets hurt” have to do with a cult ignoring animals?
I have read a couple of Francione’s books and follow him on Twitter. I don’t always agree with him, and I really wish he would say something new once in a while and not pretend he knows everything. But, from my understanding of Francione and his personality, I don’t think he is so much lying as being narrow-minded and unable to face the possibility of his ideas being wrong or negotiable. This is why I believe this post here is a bunch of hyperbole and actually resembles the way Francione talks about people he disagrees with: both sides keep saying that, “ironically,” the other side is violent.
Also, I don’t support the ALF’s property-destroying ways, and I think it’s not open-minded at all to claim that one of the biggest critics of animals-as-property is putting property above animals’ lives. There is a different understanding of strategy, not really of property per se, and to call Francione narrow-minded while making uninspired accusations about his supposedly placing property above animals strikes me as itself quite narrow-minded. Frankly, I think I am more scared of the people posting on this page than of Francione. At least he can refrain from angry hyperbole, and at least if I disagree with his limited logic, he has a logic that he has really thought out.
Francione claims to be unequivocally opposed to nonhuman animals as property, yet says “[i]f you want to rescue farm animals, go buy some” (http://www.twitlonger.com/show/117226629482a40b1a8c5ad0179fd789) rather than break unjust laws to openly or clandestinely rescue them from slavery.
See this critique of Francione’s anti-illegal direct action position by activist Jose Valle:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/a3n38
The legalist position that only state-sanctioned tactics are legitimate in the struggle and that anything else should be condemned is not only speciesist but also resigns the animal rights movement to failure.